Juridical double taxation by cross border transactions: the Block Case (C-67/08)

Treaty Establishing the European Community, operative until December 1st 2009, had already established in its article 2 the mission of the up until then European Community and actual European Union is to promote an harmonious, equilibrated and sustainable development of the economic activities of the whole Community. This Mission must be achieved by establishing a Common Market, an Economic and Monetary Union and the realization of Common Policies. One of the instruments to obtain these objectives is the use of free circulation of people, services and capitals inside the Common and Interior Market of the European Union. The European Union is characterized by the confirmation of the total movement of capitals, services and individuals and legal peoples’ freedom; freedom that was already predicated by the Maastricht Treaty, through the suppression of whatever obstacles which are in the way of the objectives before exposed. The old TEC in its Title III, now Title IV of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, covered the free circulation of people, services and capitals. Consequently, the inclusion of this mechanism inside one of the regulating texts of the European Union indicates the importance this freedom supposes for the European Union objectives’ development. Once stood up the relevance of the free movement of people, services and capitals, we must mention that in this paper we are going to centre our study in one of these freedoms of movement: the free movement of capital. In order to analyze in detail the free movement of capital within the European framework, we are going to depart from the analysis of the existent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The use of jurisprudence is basic to know how Community legislation is interpreted. For this reason, we are going to develop this work through judgements dictated by the European Union Court. This way we can observe how Member States’ regulating laws and the European Common Law affect the free movement of capital. The starting point of this paper will be the Judgement C-67/08 European Court of Justice of February 12th 2009, known as Block case. So, following the argumentation the Luxemburg Court did about the mentioned case, we are going to develop how free movement of capital could be affected by the current disparity of Member States’ legislation. This disparity can produce double taxation cases due to the lack of tax harmonized legislation within the interior market and the lack of treaties to avoid double taxation within the European Union. Developing this idea we are going to see how double taxation, at least indirectly, can infringe free movement of capital.

Armonización del Derecho penal europeo para la lucha contra el cybercrimen

Projecte de recerca elaborat a partir d’una estada al Centro di Documentazione Europea della Facoltà di Giurisprudenza dell’Università di Verona,Itàlia , entre setembre del 2007 i l’agost del 2008. Tot i que, generalment, la doctrina penalista encara no és gaire inclinada a reconèixer que les comunitats europees ostentin cap tipus de competència penal, el cert és que a través de certes vies indirectes s’ha anat creant la base d’un Dret penal europeu. Més encara, i fixant-los en les darreres sentències del Tribunal de Justícia de les Comunitats Europees i en el procés de ratificació del Tractat de Lisboa, sembla poder afirmar-se la creació d’un Dret penal europeu creat directament per les institucions comunitàries, si bé amb la deguda atenció al principi de subsidiarietat per part dels parlaments nacionals que, al seu torn, permeten assegurar el respecte al principi de legalitat penal i a les garanties i llibertats individuals, patrimoni de la Ciència penal europea.

Higher education as formation of the self and citizenship: an ethnography of the University Students from Amman, Jordan

My interest in higher education and citizenship in the Middle East at large and in Jordan in particular is fostered by some of the reflections Eickelman proposed (1992). Being a quite recent phenomenon, intimately linked with the more general topic of state formation it seemed to me more suitable to study it in a little country with a recent history (a field study left almost unexplored until now as far as Jordan is concerned, to the best of my knowledge, since Antoun 1994 focuses on the migration as a quest for higher education). The process of state formation in Jordan is quite studied. I thus intended to study the higher education policies as an attempt both to create a national citizenry and more recently as a way of controlling the more problematic part of the population (youth, which constitutes more than the double of the population. See UNDP and Ministry of Planning 2000). How do the young students enter the university system, and in which way does this system work? How is this system designed, in order to retain social control of the students (since they are usually perceived to be a factor of social and political instability, as in Iran or in Egypt)? Is there any significant difference between different faculties? And if so, why? My conclusions at this stage are that the university system is an integral part of the survival of the regime. The system works quite well, and Jordan has one of the best educational position in the region. Yet there are important distinctions to be made: the access to the better faculties is socially selective while the less valued faculties are left to the poorer and less wealthy youth. This results in a different treatment of the students and of the courses that I analysed. In the better faculties the teaching standards are quite high, and the relationship between professors and students is almost on a same-level base, while in the less privileged faculties the opposite is true. Thus we can observe a concrete politics of divide et impera intended to split the youth in two. For the more privileged there are some freedoms, both within and outside classes, designed I guess at forging them as autonomous individuals. On the opposite the less privileged are kept under tight control, even if also these students are a privileged category among youth at large.

Estados expulsores y semipersonas en la Unión Europea

La aprobación en junio de 2008 por el Parlamento Europeo de la Directiva de retorno —denominada también Directiva de la infamia o Directiva de expulsión— consolida el proceso de involución que sobre los derechos humanos se viene produciendo en la Unión Europea desde que el miedo a la inmigración irregular se incardinó en sus instituciones. Si bien las legislaciones de extranjería de los años ochenta contenían normas que regulaban el internamiento y la expulsión no es hasta la Directiva 2001/40/CE que comienza a tomar forma una política comunitaria centrada en la inmigración irregular y las expulsiones de migrantes. Las medidas de retorno son, dice la Comisión europea, “una piedra angular de la política de migración de la UE”. Desde entonces, la barbarie de los centros de retención e internamiento, el socavamiento de los derechos y la exclusión y criminalización de los migrantes extranjeros se han convertido en el caballo de batalla de las asociaciones defensoras de los derechos humanos. La erosión que las legislaciones y medidas de expulsión están provocado en los derechos y libertades y en las instituciones del Estado de derecho es inmensa. El retroceso y la erosión en los derechos y libertades es tan grande que ya no es posible continuar hablando sin más de Estados de derecho en la UE, sino más bien de máquinas administrativas para el internamiento y la expulsión, de “Estados expulsores”(1), donde las personas extranjeras son tratadas como semipersonas (2) e incluso como“no-personas” (3).

Mobile ensembles: The uses of mobile phones for social protest by Spain¿s indignados

Peer-reviewed